Exploring body composition and somatotype profiles among youth professional soccer players
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
This study aimed to analyze the body composition and somatotype of professional soccer players, investigating variations across categories and playing positions.
METHODS:
An observational, cross-sectional, and analytical study was conducted with 51 male professional soccer players in the U-19 and U-20 categories. Data about sex, age, height, and weight were collected between March and May 2023. Body composition analysis utilized the ISAK protocol for the restricted profile, while somatotype categorization employed the Heath and Carter formula. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics V.26, which involved the application of Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests to discern differences in body composition variables and proportionality based on categories and playing positions. The Dunn test further identified specific positions exhibiting significant differences.
RESULTS:
The study encompassed 51 players, highlighting meaningful differences in body composition. The average body mass in kg was 75.8 (±6.9) for U-20 players and 70.5 (±6.1) for U-19 players. The somatotype values were 2.6-4.6-2.3 for U-20 players and 2.5-4.3-2.8 for U-19 players, with a predominance of muscle mass in all categories, characterizing them as balanced mesomorphs.
CONCLUSIONS:
Body composition and somatotype findings underscore distinctions in body mass across categories and playing positions, with notably higher body mass and muscle mass predominance in elevated categories. However, the prevailing skeletal muscle development establishes a significant semblance with the recognized somatotype standard for soccer.
1Introduction
In the realm of sports medicine, understanding the intricate relationship between body composition and athletic performance is pivotal. The analysis of body composition involves dissecting body mass into its constituent components [1], playing a crucial role in determining athletic potential and success in sports. This assessment of anthropometric and physiological characteristics, combined with factors such as technical proficiency, physical fitness, functional capabilities, and psychosocial attributes, forms a holistic approach to optimizing athletic performance [2, 3].
Soccer is recognized as one of the most intricate and globally pervasive sports, demanding attention due to its intermittent nature involving alternating efforts of varied intensity, accompanied by pauses and incomplete recoveries [4, 5]. Coaches, physical trainers, and athletes increasingly acknowledge the importance of maintaining optimal physical conditions tailored to meet the dynamic requirements of soccer development [6–8].
Professional soccer players often go through changes in body composition during the season, switching from more fat mass to more lean mass [9, 10], which is crucial for improving recovery time and fatigue resistance [11, 12]. Although these variations are caused by training frequency and are directly associated with body components, it has been shown that there is no relationship between changes in performance, specifically in power or sprint, when training with eccentric overload is performed [13].
Maintaining the correct levels of body composition can be challenging. It has been observed that young professional soccer players tend to have higher levels of perfectionism level [14] and a worse body image representation compared to sedentary controls, despite having better fitness [15]. These alterations in body image can be detrimental, promoting incorrect dietary behaviors and potentially leading to eating disorders [16, 17]. Soccer players, like all athletes, are exposed to alterations in their nutritional status due to inadequate nutrition, which affects their energy requirements [18–20], Therefore, it is necessary to control caloric demand, considering the in-season and off-season stages.
Studies suggest that body fat levels are inversely correlated with aerobic fitness and sprint scores, while deviations in BMI and the percentage of fat and lean mass may influence injury risks in young professional soccer players [21, 22]. Consequently, monitoring body composition helps to achieve greater control of the players’ performance and evaluate the effectiveness of the training program executed [23].
As Velarde-Sotres et al. emphasized, monitoring and controlling body composition in sports is crucial for energy provision, temperature regulation, and nutrient transport, with lean mass playing a significant role in influencing performance factors and minimizing injury risk [24].
The diverse roles in soccer—Forward, Midfielder, Goalkeeper, and Defense—contribute to varying energy demands that influence body composition [25, 26]. Anthropometric and body composition indicators not only impact specific player attributes but also play a crucial role in distinguishing between successful and less successful young players, alongside motor coordination and physical performance measures [27, 28]. A study comparing professional soccer players from Chile and international references revealed differences specific to player positions in fat mass and height [29], underscoring the importance of position-specific considerations to understand the physical profiles of athletes. Professional-level matches showcase distinctions in the distance covered and sprint frequency among positions, with midfielders covering greater distances, defenders less, and forwards engaging in more sprints [30]. Wong et al. examined the FIFA World Cups and highlighted differences in height, weight, and BMI across playing positions, reinforcing the notion of individual physiological demands and anthropometric prerequisites for specific roles [31, 32].
The somatotype quantifies the current shape and composition of the human body, serving as a key indicator of physical structure [33, 34]. Somatotypes, categorized into endomorph, mesomorph, and ectomorph, provide insights into relative fatness, musculoskeletal robustness, and thinness, respectively, offering valuable information about individuals’ body composition and physical characteristics [35–37]. Derived by Carter into thirteen subcategories, each somatotype reflects the dominance and relationship between its components [38]. The ideal somatotype for soccer athletes varies based on sports requirements and playing positions. Several authors assert a balanced mesomorph as the most predominant somatotype in soccer [39–41], while Pfirrman et al. [42] and Perroni et al. [43] identify ectomorphs as having the highest susceptibility to various types of injuries. Understanding these somatotype nuances contributes to tailoring training and injury prevention strategies for soccer players.
This research aims to analyze the body composition and somatotype of male professional soccer players in Guayaquil, Ecuador. Given the scarcity of national studies classifying body composition and somatotype based on playing position and U categories, this work endeavors to contribute valuable data through kinanthropometry. The information gathered is expected to enhance our understanding of distinct body composition profiles and somatotypes associated with each playing position, ultimately informing more targeted nutritional and training interventions tailored to individualized needs for preventing injuries and improving sports performance.
2Materials and methods
2.1Study participants
The study followed an observational, cross-sectional and analytical design. Data were collected between March and May 2023 in Guayaquil, Ecuador. Fifty-one male players from the Barcelona Sporting Club of Guayaquil participated voluntarily, categorized as U-19 (n = 27; 17.63±0.742 years) and U-20 (n = 24; 21.04±2.758 years). It is noteworthy that in our country, there are players who play in categories older than their chronological age; they are commonly selected due to their performance or potential as soccer players. That is why, in the data obtained, the best athletes signed by the club were considered. To provide a precise definition, the U-19 category typically includes players who are 18 years old or younger, while the U-20 category generally consists of players who are 19 years old or younger. However, due to exceptional performance and potential, some players are allowed to compete in higher age categories. The “soccer age” categorization is based on the player’s age at a specific cut-off date, often at the start of the competition year. This can result in some players appearing younger or older than the typical age range for their category. For example, the mean age of 21 in the U-20 category includes players who have turned 20 during the year but are still eligible to compete until the end of the season.
The inclusion criteria were as follows: age belonging to the U-19 or U-20 categories, able to conclude a regular training or a match. Exclusion Criteria: players currently experiencing injuries or traumas that prevent them from participating in regular training and matches; the presence of significant pathologies, chronic diseases, or any condition that could significantly impact their performance. The study design and all ethical aspects were evaluated by the Research Center on Motor Activities (CRAM) Scientific Committee (Protocol n.: CRAM-030-2023, 15/03/2023). Participants and legal representatives of minors provided voluntary informed consent, aligning with international bioethical standards as per the Declaration of Helsinki Statement of 2008, updated in Fortaleza, October 2013.
2.2Material
Body mass index (BMI), body composition (muscle mass, bone mass, fat mass, and residual mass), and somatotype were calculated using ISAK METRY software. Somatotype, which categorizes body types, was classified into three categories: endomorph (high fat), mesomorph (muscular), and ectomorph (slim). Anthropometric instruments included a SECA 874 dr weighing machine, SECA 213 portable stadiometer, CESCORF skinfold caliper, LUFKIN anthropometric tape, CESCORF pachymeter, demographic pencil, NUTRI TOOLS anthropometric drawer, 2.00 m gigantograph for measuring wingspan, and square.
2.3Anthropometric assessment
Anthropometric measurements were taken by a single evaluator, an anthropometrist certified by the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK) following the ISAK protocol [44]. Anatomical points were identified and marked on the right side of the athlete. Considering these markings, the anthropometric variables were measured in triplicate, and the median value was used for analysis. Measurements were taken in the morning, after urinary emptying, and on an empty stomach, with participants barefoot and wearing minimal clothing. The restricted profile included 21 measurements encompassing body mass, height, arm span, sitting height, and skinfolds such as bicipital, tricipital, subscapular, supraespinal, ileocrestal, abdominal, front thigh, and calf. Perimeters of the relaxed arm, flexed arm, waist, hips, middle thigh, calf, and diameters of the humerus, bistyloid, and femur were also included. The measurements obtained allow the components of body composition to be established through predictive equations, using the method proposed by Heath and Carter for the somatotypic categorization of the athlete [38]. In the somatochart, the athlete’s somatotype is represented using X and Y coordinates: X axis (ectomorphy – endomorphy) and Y axis [2 x mesomorphy – (endomorphy+ectomorphy)]. The results are plotted on scales from –8 to 8 for the X coordinate and –10 to 16 for the Y coordinate. The region of the somatochart where the point is located determines the somatotypiccharacterization.
A digital data sheet or proforma sequentially recorded information following superior and inferior anatomical positions.
2.4Statistical analysis
Version 26 of Statistics Software Package R (SPSS® Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), was used, and Excel was utilized for graphical representations. Data were stratified by category and playing position. Descriptive statistics were presented as mean (±) and standard deviation (SD). Non-parametric tests were used because several variables did not follow a normal distribution. The Mann-Whitney U test compared body composition and proportionality variables between categories and playing positions. The Kruskal-Wallis test analyzed differences in main body composition variables between playing positions in each category. When significant, Dunn’s test identified specific position pairs with differences. The significance level (α) was set at 0.05 with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in all measures, adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni correction.
3Results
The statistical evaluation identified 51 participants, with 24 belonging to the U-20 category and 27 to the U-19 category. Significant differences between the U-19 and U-20 categories were observed in body mass (p = 0.006), BMI (p = 0.04), and muscle mass (p = 0.01). Anthropometric characteristics of the participants, namely, age, body mass, height, BMI, age, and body composition, are expressed in Table 1, categorized by age group (U-19 and U-20). Further, Fig. 1 reports the division based on the sport position.
Table 1
Comparison of Anthropometric and Body Composition Characteristics Between U-19 and U-20 Soccer Players
| Category | U-20 Mean (SD) | U-19 Mean (SD) | p-value* |
| n=24 | n=27 | ||
| Age (years) | 21.0 (2.7) | 17.6 (0.7) | |
| Body mass (kg) | 75.8 (6.9) | 70.5 (6.1) | 0.006 |
| Size (cm) | 178.6 (6.6) | 177.0 (6.4) | 0.33 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.7 (1.9) | 22.4 (1.5) | 0.04 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 34.8 (4.5) | 32.3 (2.7) | 0.01 |
| Muscle Mass (%) | 45.4 (4.8) | 46.0 (1.8) | 0.48 |
| Fat Mass (kg) | 18.6 (4.6) | 17.6 (3.5) | 0.43 |
| Adipose Mass (%) | 24.3 (6.7) | 24.8 (3.8) | 0.35 |
| Residual mass (kg) | 10.4 (3.6) | 9.0 (2.1) | 0.11 |
*Corresponding to the Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level of 0.05.
Fig. 1
Distribution of Players by Sport Position in U-19 and U-20 Categories.
A detailed analysis of these variables by category and position notably shows that Defenders had significantly higher body mass (p = 0.04), while Midfielders had both body mass (p = 0.04) and height (p = 0.02) in the U-20 category. Forwards and Goalkeepers did not show significant differences between categories (Table 2).
Table 2
Comparison of Anthropometric and Body Composition Characteristics by Playing Position Between U-19 and U-20 Soccer Players
| Category | U-20 Mean (SD) | U-19 Mean (SD) | p-value* |
| Defenses (19) | |||
| Body mass (kg) | 76.0 (6.2) | 70.1 (5.2) | 0.04 |
| Size (cm) | 181.1 (6.0) | 178.5 (6.2) | 0.49 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.1 (1.1) | 22.0 (1.4) | 0.13 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 36.6 (3.7) | 33.0 (2.9) | 0.06 |
| Muscle Mass (%) | 48.1 (2.9) | 47.1 (1.1) | 0.31 |
| Fat Mass(kg) | 17.0 (2.7) | 16.1 (2.1) | 0.66 |
| Fat Mass (%) | 22.6 (4.3) | 23.0 (2.6) | 0.07 |
| Residual mass (kg) | 10.0 (2.7) | 9.1 (1.7) | 0.40 |
| Midfielders (20) | |||
| Body mass (kg) | 73.7 (5.7) | 68.4 (5.9) | 0.04 |
| Size (cm) | 179.9 (5.6) | 174.0 (6.3) | 0.02 |
| BMI | 22.7 (1.8) | 22.5 (1.8) | 0.91 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 32.7 (.15) | 31.1 (2.6) | 0.23 |
| Muscle Mass (%) | 44.3 (5.3) | 45.6 (1.7) | 0.85 |
| Fat Mass(kg) | 18.4 (1.9) | 17.2 (2.7) | 0.18 |
| Fat Mass (%) | 25.1 (3.5) | 25.2 (3.5) | 0.20 |
| Residual mass (kg) | 10.5 (4.7) | 9.3 (2.4) | 0.57 |
| Forwards (8) | |||
| Body mass (kg) | 76.5 (8.6) | 71.5 (2.3) | 0.42 |
| Size (cm) | 172.7 (6.5) | 177.8 (0.2) | 0.64 |
| BMI | 25.5 (1.4) | 22.6 (0.6) | 0.07 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 34.7 (4.6) | 33.6 (1.6) | 0.64 |
| Muscle Mass (%) | 45.4 (3.9) | 47.0 (0.7) | 0.42 |
| Fat Mass(kg) | 19.3 (7.2) | 17.3 (3.6) | 0.85 |
| Fat Mass (%) | 25.2 (8.6) | 24.2 (4.3) | 1,00 |
| Residual mass (kg) | 10.5 (3.9) | 9.0 (3.1) | 0.64 |
| Goalkeepers (4)** | |||
| Body mass (kg) | 87.9 | 80.0 (2.8) | 0.50 |
| Size (cm) | 180.5 | 183.7 (4.4) | 1,00 |
| BMI | 26.9 | 23.6 (0.3) | 0.50 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 35.6 | 34.8 (1.5) | 1,00 |
| Muscle Mass (%) | 40.0 | 43.3 (1.5) | 0.50 |
| Fat mass (kg) | 29.3 | 25.1 (1.2) | 0.50 |
| Fat Mass (%) | 33,3 | 31.4 (0.4) | 0.50 |
| Residual mass (kg) | 11.2 | 7.4 (1.1) | 0.50 |
*Corresponding to the U test with a significance level of 0.05. **In U-20 there is only one goalkeeper, so SD is not calculated.
The Kruskal-Wallis test was employed to explore differences in main body composition variables (body mass, muscle mass, and fat or adipose mass) between playing positions in each category. As outlined in Table 3, the post-hoc Dunn test of multiple comparisons assessed the specific differences among the played roles. There was no significant difference in the U-20 category. The fat mass (%) for this category is illustrated in Fig. 2. The U-19 category showed significant statistical differences between playing positions for body mass, muscle mass (%), and fat mass (kg, %) (Table 3 and Fig. 3).
Table 3
Comparison of Body Mass, Muscle Mass, and Fat Mass Among Different Playing Positions in U-19 and U-20 Soccer Players
| Category | Variables | Defenders1 | Midfielders2 | Forwards3 | Goalkeeper4 | p-value* | Dunn test |
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | ||||
| U-20 | Body mass (kg) | 76.0 (6.2) | 73.7 (5.7) | 76.5 (8.6) | 87.9 ** | 0.305 | NS |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 36.6 (3.7) | 32.7 (5.1) | 34.7 (4.6) | 35.6 ** | 0.527 | NS | |
| Muscle mass (%) | 48.1 (2.9) | 44.3 (5.3) | 45.4 (3.9) | 40.4 ** | 0.080 | NS | |
| Fat mass (kg) | 17.0 (2.7) | 18.4 (1.9) | 19.3 (7.2) | 29.3 ** | 0.199 | NS | |
| Fat mass (%) | 22.6 (4.3) | 25.1 (3.5) | 25.2 (8.6) | 33.3 ** | 0.221 | NS | |
| U-19 | Body mass (kg) | 70.1 (5.2) | 68.4 (5.9) | 71.5 (2.3) | 80.0 (2.8) | 0.039 | 0.0251 - 4 |
| 0.0042 - 4 | |||||||
| Muscle mass (kg) | 33.0 (2.9) | 31.1 (2.6) | 33.6 (1.6) | 34.8 (1.5) | 0.115 | NS | |
| Muscle mass (%) | 47.1 (1.1) | 45.6 (1.7) | 47.0 (0.7) | 43.5 (1.5) | 0.01 | 0.0232 - 1 | |
| 0.0054 - 1 | |||||||
| 0.0214 - 3 | |||||||
| Fat mass (kg) | 16.1 (2.1) | 17.2 (2.7) | 17.3 (3.6) | 25.1 (1.2) | 0.041 | 0.0031 - 4 | |
| 0.0232 - 4 | |||||||
| Fat mass (%) | 23.0 (2.6) | 25.2 (3.5) | 24.2 (4.3) | 31.4 (0.4) | 0.028 | 0.0031 - 4 | |
| 0.0232 - 4 |
*Corresponding to the Kruskall-Wallis test with a significance level of 0.05. **In U-20 there is only one goalkeeper, so SD is not calculated.
Fig. 2
Fat Mass Percentage by Sport Position in U-20 Soccer Players.
Fig. 3
Comparison of Body Mass, Muscle Mass, and Fat Mass Among Different Playing Positions in U-19 Soccer Players.
Goalkeepers exhibited higher body mass than midfielders, lower muscle mass than defenders, and higher fat mass (33.3 %) compared to players in other positions.
As shown in Fig. 3, the goalkeepers are heavier, and the defenders and forwards have similar percentages of muscle mass.
Somatotype classification
In the latter part of our study, we concentrated on evaluating the somatotype of the participants as specified by the ISAK protocol. The results of this evaluation highlighted the different somatotype classifications among the players. According to the Kruskal-Wallis test, neither of the two categories demonstrated significant differences in somatotype between players in different playing positions (p > 0.05). (Table 4 and Figs. 4 and 5).
Table 4
Comparison of Somatotype Characteristics Among Different Playing Positions in U-19 and U-20 Soccer Players
| Category | Variables | Defenders | Midfielders | Forwards | Goalkeeper | p-value* |
| Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | Mean (SD) | |||
| U-20 | Endomorph | 2.6 (0.8) | 2.6 (0.9) | 2.4 (0.9) | 5.0** | 0.40 |
| Mesomorph | 4.1 (1.7) | 5.1 (0.9) | 4.4 (1.4) | 5.3** | 0.23 | |
| Ectomorph | 2.3 (0.0) | 2.3 (0.9) | 2.5 (1.3) | 1.1** | 0.52 | |
| U-19 | Endomorph | 2.6 (0.8) | 2.4 (0.9) | 2.6 (0.7) | 2.0 (0.4) | 0.85 |
| Mesomorph | 4.6 (0.7) | 4.2 (1.1) | 4.8 (0.1) | 3.7 (0.8) | 0.35 | |
| Ectomorph | 2.5 (0.6) | 3.0 (1.1) | 2.4 (1.0) | 3.3 (1.1) | 0.65 |
*Kruskal-Wallis Test for independent samples. **In U-20 there is only one goalkeeper, so SD is not calculated.
Fig. 4
Somatotype Distribution of U-20 Soccer Players by Playing Position.
Fig. 5
Somatotype Distribution of U-19 Soccer Players by Playing Position.
The average somatotype of the players in the U-20 and U-19 categories was categorized as balanced mesomorph, characterized by dominant mesomorphy while endomorphy and ectomorphy were similar (differing by no more than 0.5). This classification applied to all playing positions except for goalkeepers. Players exhibited moderate skeletal muscle development, with values ranging from 3 to 5.5. Additionally, low endomorphy and ectomorphy values (less than 3) indicated minimal subcutaneous fat and prominent muscle and bone contours.
Moreover, the anthropometric characteristics, body composition and somatotype of all participants are detailed in the supplementary material (S1).
4Discussion
The primary objective of this study was to analyze the body composition and somatotype of youth professional soccer players in Guayaquil, categorized by U-19 and U-20 groups and playing positions. As a sport with diverse demands, soccer necessitates multifaceted considerations for reaching optimal performance levels, with anthropometry playing a pivotal role [45]. The anthropometric assessment becomes crucial in tailoring training programs and understanding the distinctive physical attributes associated with different playing positions [46].
In the general analysis of body composition variables across U categories, significant differences were spotted in body and muscle mass, irrespective of playing position. Notably, the U-20 category consistently demonstrated favorable outcomes in these variables. Similar results were found in a study by Bernal-Orozco et al. [2] at the Guadalajara Sports Club, aligning with our results and emphasizing the significance of the U-20 category in exhibiting higher body mass and muscle mass. Similarly, Hernández-Jaña et al. [47] studied a group of Chilean soccer players and corroborated these trends, revealing that the U-20 category tends to exhibit values comparable to elite categories, differentiating them from younger counterparts. This phenomenon may be due to the growth spurt still needing to be completed in 19-year-old males, considering that some parameters like bone density [48] and strength [49] achieve their peak around 20–30 years old.
A distinct observation emerged in the analysis of goalkeepers, where no significant differences in body composition were noted between the U-20 and U-19 categories. Nevertheless, within the U-19 category, goalkeepers exhibited higher values in both fat and body mass percentages. These outcomes resonate with prior studies conducted in Ecuador by Quiroz-Brunes et al. [50] and Alvarado et al. [8], reinforcing the pattern that goalkeepers tend to exhibit higher fat mass percentages and body mass compared to other positions. These findings are consistent with broader research by Gjonbalaj et al. [51] and Mevaloo et al. [52], establishing goalkeepers as players with a higher fat mass percentage. This could be explained by the physical demands required for the goalkeeper role. It has been shown that an elite Premier League goalkeeper has an average gap in daily energy expenditure of 600 kcal per day compared to other players in the same team [53].
An intriguing revelation surfaced in midfielders, particularly in the U-20 category, where higher body mass and height were observed compared to their U-19 counterparts. Additionally, the U-20 midfielders displayed the highest fat mass percentage within their category. These findings deviate from some existing studies, such as those conducted by Gjonbalaj et al. [51] and Mevaloo et al. [52], which traditionally identify goalkeepers as having the highest fat mass percentages.
Examining the somatotypes depicted in Figs. 4 and 5, it becomes apparent that both U categories and playing positions maintain a balanced mesomorph somatotype on average, indicating a prevalence of mesomorphism in physical characteristics. Our results align with those of Hazir [54] and Sebastiá-Rico et al. [55], supporting the notion that the balanced mesomorph somatotype prevails in professional soccer players.
Despite the valuable insights garnered, the study faced limitations, primarily stemming from the sample size constraints. This was particularly evident in the U-20 category, where only one goalkeeper was available, affecting the generalizability of the findings. Consequently, in-depth analyses between playing positions in this category were hindered. However, significant findings were achieved within the U-19 category, which are consistent with the broader range of literature.
The insights derived from body composition and anthropometric variables extend beyond performance indicators. They offer valuable insights into athletes’ health and nutritional needs and provide a basis for tailored, individualized training programs for injury prevention and sports performance improvement [56]. The results of this research add to the developing comprehension of the interplay between anthropometry and the physical and physiological demands of soccer at the youth-professional level.
5Conclusion
The comprehensive analysis of body composition among soccer players revealed more pronounced variations based on playing positions than within U categories. Notably, goalkeepers consistently exhibited higher fat mass than other playing positions, aligning with established patterns observed in prior studies. Regardless of the U category and playing position, the prevailing somatotype observed was a balanced mesomorph, underscoring the uniformity in physical characteristics among soccer players.
When stratified by playing positions, anthropometric analysis emerges as a valuable tool for monitoring athlete health and gaining deeper insights into individualized training and nutritional requirements. Recognizing the distinct physical demands of each playing position allows for more targeted and tailored approaches to optimizing player performance.
A longitudinal approach could be considered in future research endeavors, spanning the entire soccer season. This extended timeline would provide a more nuanced understanding of how different stages and training intensities throughout the season may influence the body composition of soccer athletes. Such investigations could yield valuable information for devising season-specific training and nutritional strategies tailored to the evolving needs of players. Overall, the current study contributes to the evolving body of knowledge in sports medicine, emphasizing the importance of individualized approaches to injury prevention and for the improvement of sports performance of soccer players.
Funding statement
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Author contributions
Conceptualization, G.M., R.Z-V, E.F-T., A.C. and A.L.; methodology, A.V-S., F.R. and X.W.; data curation, E.M-P., C.P-L. and P.L; writing-original draft preparation, R.Z-V., C.P-L., B.T., F.R., A.C. and X.W.; writing—review and editing, G.M., A.L, R.Z-V. and E.F-T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Institutional review board statement
The study was designed and approved by the Research Center on Motor Activities (CRAM) Scientific Committee (Protocol n.: CRAM-030-2023, 15/03/2023).
Informed consent statement
Participants and legal representatives of minors provided voluntary informed consent, aligning with international bioethical standards as per the Declaration of Helsinki Statement of 2008, updated in Fortaleza, October 2013.
Supplementary material
[1] The supplementary material is available in the electronic version of this article: https://dx.doi.org/10.3233/MNM-240038.
References
[1] | Silva AL , et al. Portuguese Adolescents Diet Quality, Lifestyle Variables and Body Composition, in Relation to Precise Measures of Maturity. Mediterr J Nutr Metab. (2020) ;29–41. doi:10.3233/MNM-190346. |
[2] | Bernal-Orozco MF , Posada-Falomir M , Quiñónez-Gastélum CM , Plascencia-Aguilera LP , Arana-Nuño JR , Badillo-Camacho N , et al. Anthropometric and body composition profile of young professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. (2020) ;34: (7):1911–23. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000003416. |
[3] | Leão C , Camões M , Clemente FM , Nikolaidis PT , Lima R , Bezerra P , et al. Anthropometric profile of soccer players as a determinant of position specificity and methodological issues of body composition estimation. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2019) ;16: (13):2386. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16132386. |
[4] | Stepinski M , Ceylan HI , Zwierko T . Seasonal variation of speed, agility and power performance in elite female soccer players: effect of functional fitness. Phys Activ Rev. (2020) ;8: (1):16–25. doi: 10.16926/par.2020.08.03. |
[5] | Kolbowicz M , Nowak M , Więckowski J . A multi-criteria system for performance assessment and support decision-making based on the example of Premier League top football strikers. Phys Act Rev. (2024) ;12: (1):121–42. doi: 10.16926/par.2024.12.12. |
[6] | Junior MAF , Del Conti Esteves JV , de Moraes SMF , et al. Comparison of anthropometric and physical profiles of futsal athletes from under-17 and adult categories. Sport Sci Health. (2017) ;13: :107–12. doi: 10.1007/s11332-016-0317-6. |
[7] | Gomez-Campos R , Santi-Maria T , Arruda M , Maldonado T , Albernaz A , Schiavo M , et al. Fat-Free Mass and Bone Mineral Density of young soccer players: Proposal of equations based on anthropometric variables. Front Psychol. (2019) ;10: :522. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00522. |
[8] | Alvarado Dominguez N , Gutiérrez Cruz M ((2023) ) Anthropometric characteristics, body composition and somatotype by playing positions in Ecuadorian professional soccer players. Ciencia y Deporte. 8: :4310. |
[9] | Silva JR . The soccer season: performance variations and evolutionary trends. PeerJ. (2022) ;10: :e14082. doi: 10.7717/peerj.14082. |
[10] | Iga J , Scott M , George K , Drust B . Seasonal changes in multiple indices of body composition in professional football players. Int J Sports Med. (2014) ;35: (12):994–8. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1371833. |
[11] | Hader K , Rumpf MC , Hertzog M , Kilduff LP , Girard O , Silva JR . Monitoring the athlete match response: Can external load variables predict post-match acute and residual fatigue in Soccer? A systematic review with meta-analysis. Sports Med Open. (2019) ;5: (1):48. doi: 10.1186/s40798-019-0219-7. |
[12] | Silva JR , Rumpf MC , Hertzog M , et al. Acute and residual soccer match-related fatigue: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. (2018) ;48: (3):539–83. doi: 10.1007/s40279-017-0798-8. |
[13] | Suarez-Arrones L , Saez de Villarreal E , Núñez FJ , Di Salvo V , Petri C , Buccolini A , Maldonado RA , Torreno N , Mendez-Villanueva A . In-season eccentric-overload training in elite soccer players: Effects on body composition, strength and sprint performance. PLoS One. (2018) ;16;13: (10):e0205332. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205332. |
[14] | Abbott W , Brett A , Brownlee TE , et al. The prevalence of disordered eating in elite male and female soccer players. Eat Weight Disord. (2021) ;26: (2):491–8. doi: 10.1007/s40519-020-00872-0. |
[15] | Arroyo M , Gonzalez-de-Suso JM , Sanchez C , Ansotegui L , Rocandio AM . Body image and body composition: comparisons of young male elite soccer players and controls. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. (2008) ;18: (6):628–38. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.18.6.628. |
[16] | Tekin T , Bağlam N . Body Weight Gain in Adolescents Can Increase the Risk of Developing an Eating Disorder. Mediterr J Nutr Metab. (2023) ;16: (3):213–22. |
[17] | Hosseini SA , Padhy RK . Body Image Distortion (2023) . In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing. |
[18] | Pareja Esteban JA , Almoguera Martínez A , García-López M , Fraga Vicandi J , Collantes Casanova A . Estado nutricional y hábitos alimenticios en un equipo de fútbol profesional. Nutr Clín Diet Hosp. (2021) ;41: (1). doi: 10.12873/411pareja. |
[19] | Steffl M , Kinkorova I , Kokstejn J , Petr M . Macronutrient Intake in Soccer Players-A Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. (2019) ;9;11: (6):1305. doi: 10.3390/nu11061305. |
[20] | Anderson L , Orme P , Naughton RJ , Close GL , Milsom J , Rydings D , O’Boyle A , Di Michele R , Louis J , Hambly C , Speakman JR , Morgans R , Drust B , Morton JP . Energy Intake and Expenditure of Professional Soccer Players of the English Premier League: Evidence of Carbohydrate Periodization. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. (2017) ;27: (3):228–38. doi: 10.1123/ijsnem.2016-0259. |
[21] | Brocherie F , Girard O , Forchino F , Al Haddad H , Dos Santos GA , Millet GP . Relationships between anthropometric measures and athletic performance, with special reference to repeated-sprint ability, in the Qatar National Soccer Team. J Sports Sci. (2014) ;32: (13):1243–54. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2013.862840. |
[22] | Kemper G , Van Der Sluis A , Brink M , Visscher C , Frencken W , Elferink-Gemser M . Anthropometric injury risk factors in elite-standard youth soccer. Int J Sports Med. (2015) ;36: (13):1112–7. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1555778. |
[23] | Spehnjak M , Gušić M , Molnar S , Baić M , Andrašić S , Selimi M , Mačak D , Madić DM , žilič Fišer S , Sporiš G , et al. Body Composition in Elite Soccer Players from Youth to Senior Squad. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021) ;18: :4982. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18094982. |
[24] | Velarde-Sotres á , Bores-Cerezal A , Mecías-Calvo M , Barcala-Furelos M , Aparicio-Obregón S , Calleja-González J . Detection of upper limb asymmetries in athletes according to the stage of the season-A longitudinal study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2022) ;19: (2):849. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19020849. |
[25] | Soós I , Borysławski K , Boraczyński M , Ihasz F , Podstawski R . Anthropometric and physiological profiles of Hungarian youth male soccer players of varying ages and playing positions: A multidimensional assessment with a critical approach. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2022) ;19: (17):1104. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191711041. |
[26] | Bongiovanni T , Rossi A , Genovesi F , Martera G , Puleo G , Orlandi C , Spedicato M , Iaia FM , Del Vescovo R , Gallo S , et al. How do football playing positions differ in body composition? A first insight into white Italian serie A and serie B players. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. (2023) ;8: (2):80. doi: 10.3390/jfmk8020080. |
[27] | Figueiredo AJ , Gonçalves CE , Coelho E Silva MJ , Malina RM . Youth soccer players, 11– 14 Years: maturity, size, function, skill and goal Orientation. Ann Hum Biol. (2009) ;36: (1):60–73. doi: 10.1080/03014460802570584. |
[28] | Parpa K , Michaelides M . Age-related differences in the anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics of young soccer players: A Cross-Sectional Study. Children (Basel). (2022) ;9: (5):650. doi: 10.3390/children9050650. |
[29] | Hernández-Mosqueira C , Castillo-Quezada H , Peña-Troncoso S , Hermosilla-Palma F , Pavez-Adasme G , Fernandes Da Silva S , Caniuqueo-Vargas A , Cresp-Barria M , Velasquez-Gonzalez H , Fernandes Filho J . Perfil Antropométrico de Futbolistas profesionales de acuerdo a la posición ocupada en el Campo de Juego (Anthropometric profile of professional football players according to the position occupied in the playing field). Retos. (2022) ;44: :702–8. doi: 10.47197/retos.v44i0.90770. |
[30] | Di Salvo V , Gregson W , Atkinson G , Tordoff P , Drust B . Analysis of high intensity activity in premier league soccer. Int J Sports Med. (2009) ;30: (3):205–12. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1105950. |
[31] | Wong Pl , Chamari K , Dellal A , Wisløff U . Relationship between anthropometric and physiological characteristics in youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. (2009) ;23: (4):1204–10. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31819f1e52. |
[32] | Gravina L , Gil SM , Ruiz F , Zubero J , Gil J , Irazusta.Anthropometric and physiological differences between first team and reserve soccer players aged 10-14 years at the beginning and end of the Season. J Strength Cond Res. (2008) ;22: (4):1308–14. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31816a5c8e. |
[33] | Poveda-Loor C , Yaguachi-Alarcón R , Espinoza-Burgos A , Frias-Toral E , Suárez R . Dietary intake, anthropometric profile and somatotype in university athletes: differences between gender and sports practiced. Mediterr J Nutr Metab. (2023) ;16: (2):335–52. doi: 10.3233/mnm-230065. |
[34] | Bertuccioli A , Sisti D , Amatori S , Perroni F , Rocchi MBL , Benelli P , Trecroci A , Di Pierro F , Bongiovanni T , Cannataro R . A new strategy for somatotype assessment using bioimpedance analysis: Stratification according to sex. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. (2022) ;7: (4):86. doi: 10.3390/jfmk7040086. |
[35] | Tóth T , Michalíková M , Bednarčíková L , živčák J , Kneppo P . Somatotypes in Sport. Acta Mech. (2014) ;8: (1):27–32. doi: 10.2478/ama-2014-0005. |
[36] | Porta M , Sebastiá-Rico J , Martínez-Sanz JM , Contreras C , Vaquero-Cristóbal R , López-Cáceres PA . Anthropometric Values in Spanish Elite Soccer: Differences between Divisions and Playing Positions. Applied Sciences. (2023) ;13: (20):11441. doi: 10.3390/app132011441. |
[37] | Doménech C , Roche E , Reina R , Sarabia JM . Somatotype Analysis of international football players with cerebral palsy: A comparison with non-disabled football players. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. (2023) ;8: (4):166. doi: 10.3390/jfmk8040166. |
[38] | Carter JEL . Part 1: The Heath-Carter Anthropometric Somatotype-Instruction Manual; Department of Exercise and Nutritional Sciences San Diego State University. (2002) ;1–26. |
[39] | Slimani M , Nikolaidis PT . Anthropometric and physiological characteristics of male soccer players according to their competitive level, playing position and age group: a systematic review. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. (2019) ;59: (1):141–63. doi: 10.23736/S0022-4707.17.07950-6. |
[40] | Rodríguez Rodríguez F , López-Fuenzalida A , Holway F , Jorquera-Aguilera C . Diferencias antropométricas por posición de juego en futbolistas profesionales chilenos [Anthropometric differences per playing position in Chilean professional footballers]. Nutr Hosp. (2019) ;36: (4):846–53. doi: 10.20960/nh.02474. |
[41] | Zuñiga Galaviz U , Osorio Gutiérrez A , Toledo Domínguez I De J , Herrera Perea R . Somatotype of Mexican soccer players from different competition level. Retos. (2018) ;34: :100–2. doi: 10.47197/retos.v0i34.52031. |
[42] | Pfirrmann D , Herbst M , Ingelfinger P , Simon P , Tug S . Analysis of injury incidences in male professional adult and elite youth soccer players: A Systematic Review. J Athl Train. (2016) ;51: (5):410–22. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-51.6.03. |
[43] | Perroni F , Vetrano M , Camolese G , Guidetti L , Baldari C . Anthropometric and somatotype characteristics of young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. (2015) ;29: (8):2097–104. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000881. |
[44] | Esparza-Ros F , Vaquero-Cristóbal R , Marfell-Jones M . ISAK Accreditation handbook. Guadalupe (Murcia), Spain: The International Society For The Advancement Of Kinanthropometry ISAK (2019) . |
[45] | Nobari H , Eken Ö , Prieto-Gonzalez P , Brito JP , Oliveira R . Associations among maturity, accumulated workload, physiological, and body composition factors in youth soccer players: A comparison between playing positions. Biology (Basel). (2022) ;11: (11):1605. doi: 10.3390/biology11111605. |
[46] | López-Jiménez A , Morán-Fagúndez L , Sánchez-Sánchez AM , Fernández-Pachón MS . The associations between anthropometric characteristics and nutritional parameters in male elite rugby union players. Int J Food Sci Nutr. (2023) ;74: (6):707–18. doi: 10.1080/09637486.2023.2246699. |
[47] | Hernández-Jaña S , Jorquera-Aguilera C , Almagià-Flores Aa , Yáñez-Sepúlveda R , Rodríguez-Rodríguez F . Body composition and proportionality in Chilean soccer players. Differences between youth categories and professional champions. Int J Morphol. (2021) ;39: (1):252–9. doi: 10.4067/S0717-95022021000100252. |
[48] | Lu J , Shin Y , Yen MS , Sun SS . Peak bone mass and patterns of change in total bone mineral density and bone mineral contents from childhood into young adulthood. J Clin Densitom. (2016) ;19: (2):180–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2014.08.001. |
[49] | Hong SH , Choi KM . Sarcopenic obesity, insulin resistance, and their implications in cardiovascular and metabolic consequences. Int J Mol Sci. (2020) ;21: (2):494. doi: 10.3390/ijms21020494. |
[50] | Quiroz-Brunes J , Poveda-Loor C , Cabañas-Armesilla M , Alvarez-Cordova L . Anthropometric profile and body composition in Ecuadorian elite soccer players according to their playing position. Rev Med UCSG. (2023) ;24: , 21–8. |
[51] | Gjonbalaj M , Georgiev G , Bjelica D . Differences in anthropometric characteristics, somatotype components, and functional abilities among young elite Kosovo soccer players based on team position. Int J Morphol. (2018) ;36: (1):41–7. doi: 10.4067/S0717-95022018000100041. |
[52] | Mevaloo SF , Mevaloo AF , Mirali M . Somatotype of Iranian Soccer Premier League Players. International Journal of Kinanthropometry. (2021) ;1: (1):72–7. doi: 10.34256/ijk21110. |
[53] | Anderson L , Close GL , Morgans R , et al. Assessment of energy expenditure of a professional goalkeeper from the English premier league using the doubly labeled water method. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. (2019) ;14: (5):681–4. doi: 10.1123/ijs2018-0520. |
[54] | Hazir T . Physical characteristics and somatotype of soccer players according to playing level and position. J Hum Kinet. (2010) ;26: (1):83–95. doi: 10.2478/v10078-010-0052-z. |
[55] | Sebastiá-Rico J , Soriano JM , González-Gálvez N , Martínez-Sanz JM . Body Composition of Male Professional Soccer Players Using Different Measurement Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients. (2023) ;15: :1160. doi: 10.3390/nu15051160. |
[56] | Sahnoune R , Bouchenak M . Nutritional Intervention Promoting Mediterranean Diet Improves Dietary Intake and Enhances Score Adherence in Adolescent Athletes. Mediterr J Nutr Metab. (2020) ;13: (3):237–53. doi: 10.3233/MNM-200414. |
